osmplotr onboarding request

[mpadge]

• 1. What does this package do? (explain in 50 words or less)
     Produces visually impressive customisable images from OpenStreetMap data
• 1. Paste the full DESCRIPTION file inside a code block below.

Produces customisable images of OpenStreetMap data.  Extracts OpenStreetMap data for specified key-value pairs (e.g.  key="building") using the overpass API. Different OSM objects can be plotted in different colours using the function add_osm_objects().  The function group_osm_objects() enables customised highlighting of selected regions using different graphical schemes designed to contrast with surrounding backgrounds.

[added by @richfitz:

Package: osmplotr
Title: Customisable Images of OpenStreetMap Data
Version: 0.1-2
Date: 2016-03-01
Authors@R: person("Mark", "Padgham", email = "mark.padgham@email.com", role = c("aut", "cre"))
Description: Produces customisable images of OpenStreetMap data.  Extracts OpenStreetMap data for specified key-value pairs (e.g.  key="building") using the overpass API. Different OSM objects can be plotted in different colours using the function add_osm_objects().  The function group_osm_objects() enables customised highlighting of selected regions using different graphical schemes designed to contrast with surrounding backgrounds.
Depends: R (>= 3.2.3)
Imports: 
    ggm,
    igraph,
    httr,
    methods,
    osmar, 
    rgeos,
    sp, 
    spatstat, 
    XML,
Suggests: knitr,
    roxygen2,
    rmarkdown,
    devtools,
    maptools,
    RColorBrewer
License: GPL-3
URL: https://github.com/mpadge/osmplotr
LazyData: true
VignetteBuilder: knitr

]

• 1. URL for the package (the development repository, not a stylized html page)
     github
• 1. What data source(s) does it work with (if applicable)?
     OpenStreetMap
• 1. Who is the target audience?
     Anyone working in the built environment wanting to improve data visualisation
• 1. Are there other R packages that accomplish the same thing? If so, what is different about yours?
     No there are not. "openstreetmap" merely pulls straight raster images that are definitely not customisable at all. "osmar"---on which "osmplotr" depends---does provide plot methods, but these are very restricted and not able to be customised any further. "tmap" provides customisable spatial visualisations, but only uses OSM data directly from the "OpenStreetMap" package, which yields a direct OSM-style raster file that is not customisable. (tmap is also not on git nor any other open repo.)

In short: This is the only package that allows OpenStreetMap data to be presented in a visually customisable way.

• 1. Check the box next to each policy below, confirming that you agree. These are mandatory.
  • [y] This package does not violate the Terms of Service of any service it interacts with.
  • [y] The repository has continuous integration with Travis CI and/or another service
  • [y] The package contains a vignette
  • [y] The package contains a reasonably complete README with devtools install instructions
  • [n] The package contains unit tests
  • [y] The package only exports functions to the NAMESPACE that are intended for end users
• 1. Do you agree to follow the rOpenSci packaging guidelines? These aren't mandatory, but we strongly suggest you follow them. If you disagree with anything, please explain.
  • [n] Are there any package dependencies not on CRAN?
  • [y] Do you intend for this package to go on CRAN? It already is
  • [y] Does the package have a CRAN accepted license?
  • [n] Did devtools::check() produce any errors or warnings?
• 1. Please add explanations below for any exceptions to the above:
     Most package functionality is already tested in the vignettes, and thus there are currently no unit tests. The most important way to test the package is to use it to extract strange kinds of OpenStreetMap data -- not something that can be performed with any inbuilt tests. I plan to incorporate tests once I hear of strange behaviour, but can not pre-empt what this might be.
• 1. If this is a resubmission following rejection, please explain the change in circumstances.

[sckott]

Reviewers: @jhollist

[sckott]

Thanks for your submission @mpadge ! We've assigned a reviewer and we'll get back to you soon with reviews and continue the discussion from there

[sckott]

@jhollist - hey there, it's been 17 days, please get your review in by Mar 26, thanks 😺

[mpadge]

@jhollist Sorry if the constant changes throughout the review period have made your job more difficult. Should pretty much remain as is from here on. Thanks @sckott

[jhollist]

@mpadge I have not done too much yet with the review. Getting ready to start on it right now so the changes haven't been a problem. I hope to have review posted in a day or two.

[jhollist]

@mpadge and @sckott Working through the review, but other stuff has gotten in the way this week. I am about 75% done and will have it posted early next week.

[sckott]

@jhollist - hey there, it's been 21 days, please get your review in soon, thanks 😺 (ropensci-bot)

[sckott]

(apologies jeff for the 2nd ping, working on making the bot more humane, e.g., we probably shouldn't ping right after you had discussion about almost being done)

[jhollist]

No worries!

On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 9:36 PM, Scott Chamberlain <notifications@github.com

wrote:

(apologies jeff for the 2nd ping, working on making the bot more humane,
e.g., we probably shouldn't ping right after you had discussion about
almost being done)

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#27 (comment)

Jeff W. Hollister
email: jeff.w.hollister@gmail.com
google voice: 401 326 2531
cell: 401 556 4087